Abstract
The bow-and-arrow was a major radical innovation and ‘a nearly ubiquitous example of the evolution of a cultural trait’ whose diffusion led to extraordinary socio-economic developments. Unfortunately, the emergence of this new technology is not easy to research: most modules composing the weapon – made of perishable materials – rarely survive, so the remaining physical evidence is found mainly in small stone components: the arrowheads. Moreover, the evolutionary theories of technological change face difficulties in explaining the inception of this kind of discontinuous, radical innovation.
This paper addresses the bow-and-arrow case through a novel evolutionary approach to technological change based on the evolution of bacteria rather than that of eukaryotes and therefore acknowledging Horizontal Transfer (the recombination of functional modules across diverse lineages) as an evolutionary force as powerful as Vertical Inheritance.
The interplay between technological and cultural processes clearly emerges through the evolutionary trajectory of the bow-and-arrow, in that it is impossible to understand it without considering it both a technological radical innovation and a cultural trait.
Finally, the author argues that the same evolutionary pattern could apply to many a radical innovation, opening new interesting research avenues both for innovation management and for evolutionary archeology, and possibly contributing in shedding some light on the nature and origin of technology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
Shea and Sisk argue that the Neanderthal, burdened by their higher (in comparison with the Sapiens) daily caloric requirements, could not allot the time and resources necessary to develop mechanically-projected weaponry. The Neanderthal mastered composite (modular) technology (and in particular hafted tools and weapons) well before the invention of the bow-and-arrow (Wragg Sykes 2015) but no evidence of Neanderthal-made bow-and-arrows has been discovered yet.
- 3.
- 4.
The atlatl (Shea and Sisk 2010) and a number of much more recent weapons, including ballistas, catapults, and crossbows also belong to this class of artifacts.
- 5.
For example Baldwin and Clarke (2000), while introducing an elaborate and important theory of modularity in complex technological systems explicitly refuse the concept of function as a foundational property of modularity. Their definition of modularity “is based on relationship among structures, not functions” because functions “are inherently manifold and nonstationary” (ivi: 63, footnote 2).
- 6.
Discussing in depth the epistemological base supporting the adoption of the etiological concept of proper function in technology is out of the scope of this paper: please refer to Andriani and Carignani (2014) for a more detailed discussion.
- 7.
Connection: The reader can refer to the Connection in Sect. 3.1 for additional references and connections to the concept of exaptation.
- 8.
Connection: Chap. 15 presents a theoretical background on archaelogical methodologies.
- 9.
The Howieson’s Poort culture flourished across a vast area in southern Africa from 65 to 60 kyr ago (Jacobs and Roberts 2009).
- 10.
Including both non-human and human animals: an arrow shoulder shot is the probable cause of death of Ötzi, the famous Tyrolean Neolithic Iceman discovered in 1991 on the Italian-Austrian border (Gostner and Egarter 2002). Ötzi himself was carrying a bow and some arrows.
- 11.
- 12.
Carl Woese conjectured the existence of a critical discontinuity in biological evolution, the Darwinian Threshold. Before the Darwinian Threshold Horizontal Transfer was rampant, species did not exist, and evolution was essentially reticulate. The existence of the Darwinian Threshold is not a necessary hypothesis for the extended model of technological evolution I adopt here in that the importance and ubiquity of Horizontal Genetic Transfer in bacterial evolution is independently recognized in literature. However, I adopt the term ‘Woesian’ model because the fascinating representation of evolution preceding the Threshold given by Woese seems to capture perfectly the dynamics of the industrial revolutions, in which radical innovations arise and new industries are born: ‘only global invention arising in a diverse collection of primitive entities is capable of providing the requisite novelty.’ (Woese 2002: 8746).
- 13.
It is hardly necessary to notice that scientific knowledge of the underlying phenomena is useful but not necessary to technology development
- 14.
Here I refer to the deceptively simple definitions given by O’Brien and Lyman (2002: 26): ‘a replicator is an entity that passes its structure directly through replication’. The concept will be discussed in more depth later in this paper.
- 15.
Actually, the inventors, since the process happened several times in different places and times. Arthur dislikes the term inventor because it ‘has connotations of lone eccentric at work’ (Arthur 2009: 111), suggesting the adoption of the term originator instead. On the same wavelength Basalla (1982) warns against the naïve concept of heroic inventor. I cannot disagree with these distinguished scholars from an evolutionary point of view. But there is also a human side to inventions. Indeed, the persons who originate radical innovations are remembered in the historical record as men and women of vision and commitment who struggled to transform their ideas into reality, engaging in what can often be defined a heroic battle against conventional wisdom and established expertise. The unknown people who invented the bow-and-arrow were probably no exception: I will therefore skip Arthur’s ‘originator’ suggestion maintaining, instead, the more romantic term inventor.
- 16.
We notice that while the phenomenon underlying the invention is the same in snares and in bow-drills (the flexural behavior of certain materials physically described by Hooke’s law), two different functionalities are exploited for the two artifacts: providing a tensional force is the functionality for which the bow is used in the drill, while storing and discharging elastic energy is what it provides in the snare. So, while the drill-bow is more similar to the form of the bow in the weapon the functioning of the weapon is better understood by seeing a snare in action.
- 17.
- 18.
The term ‘naturifact’ is used by Basalla (1988: 50) to indicate natural objects that ‘could serve as models to initiate the process of technological evolution’
- 19.
- 20.
This is particularly true in this study since scientific knowledge and the technical community were not very developed in Paleolithic times.
- 21.
Sensu Henderson and Clark (1990).
References
Abernathy, W., & Utterback, J. (1978). Patterns of industrial innovation. Technology Review, 80(7), 40–47.
Andriani, P., & Carignani, G. (2014). Modular exaptation: A missing link in the synthesis of artificial form. Research Policy, 43(9), 1608–1620.
Andriani, P., & Cohen, J. (2013). From exaptation to radical niche construction in biological and technological complex systems. Complexity, 18(5), 7–14.
Andriani, P., Carignani, G., & Kaminska-Labbe, R. (2013). The appearance of new functions in technological innovation: The role of exaptation. Academy of Management Proceedings. 2013:1 11518.
Arthur, W. B. (2007). The structure of invention. Research Policy, 36, 274–278.
Arthur, W. B. (2009). The nature of technology. New York: Free Press.
Baldwin, C. Y., & Clark, K. B. (2000). Design rules: The power of modularity. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Baldwin, C., & von Hippel, E. (2011). Modeling a paradigm shift: From producer innovation to user and open collaborative innovation. Organization Science, 22(6), 1399–1417.
Basalla, G. (1988). The evolution of technology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bijker, W. E. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites and bulbs: Towards a theory of sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Boyle, W. S., & Smith, G. E. (1970). Charge coupled semiconductor devices. Bell System Technical Journal, 49(4), 587–593.
Brown, K. S., Marean, C. W., Jacobs, Z., Schoville, B. Z., Oestmo, S., Fisher, E. C., Bernatchez, J., Karkanas, P., & Matthews, T. (2012). An early and enduring advanced technology originating 71,000 years ago in South Africa. Nature, 491, 590–593.
Carignani, G., Andriani, P., & De Toni, A. F. (2011). The evolution of modularity and architectural innovation: Web-enabled collective development of a tangible artifact. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 14(4), 333–355.
Cattani, G. (2005). Preadaptation, firm heterogeneity, and technological performance: A study on the evolution of fiber optics, 1970–1995. Organization Science, 16(6), 563–580.
Cattani, G. (2006). Technological pre-adaptation, speciation, and emergence of new technologies: How corning invented and developed fiber optics. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(2), 285–318.
Cattani, G., Dunbar, R. L. M., & Shapira, Z. B. (2013a). Value creation and knowledge loss: The case of cremonese stringed instruments. Organization Science, 24(3), 813–830.
Cattani, G., Carignani, G., & Zaina, G. (2013b). A Woesian perspective of technological change. Paper presented at the 2nd European theory development workshop in OMT & strategy, 20–21 June 2013, HEC Paris.
Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator dilemma. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Constant, E. W. (1980). The origins of the turbojet revolution. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Cuènot, L. (1914). Thèorie de la prèadaptation. Scientia, 16, 60–73.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the origins of species (1st ed.). London: Murray.
De la Cruz, F., & Davies, J. (2000). Horizontal gene transfer and the origin of species: Lessons from bacteria. Trends in Microbiology, 8(3), 128–133.
De Paolo, C. (2003). Human prehistory in fiction. Jefferson: McFarland & C. Publishers.
Del Rey, L. (1939). The day is done. In Astounding science fiction. New York City: Street and Smith Publications.
Dew, N., Sarasvathy, S. D., & Venkataraman, S. (2004). The economic implications of exaptation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14, 69–84.
Doolittle, W. F., & Bapteste, E. (2007). Pattern pluralism and the tree of life hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(7), 2043–2049.
Eisen, J. A. (2000). Horizontal gene transfer among microbial genomes: New insights from complete genome analysis. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, 10, 606–611.
Ganfornina, M. D., & Sanchez, D. (1999). Generation of evolutionary novelty by functional shift. BioEssays, 21, 432–439.
Geroski, P. A. (2003). The evolution of new markets. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Giffard, H. S. (forthcoming). Making jet engines. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Gilfillan, S. C. (1935). Inventing the ship. Chicago: Follet Publishing Company.
Gostner, P., & Egarter, E. V. (2002). Report of radiological-forensic findings on the iceman. Journal of Archaeological Science, 29(3), 323–326.
Gould, S. J. (1987). An urchin in the storm. New York: Norton.
Gould, S. J., & Vrba, E. S. (1982). Exaptation – A missing term in the science of form. Paleobiology, 8, 4–15.
Greenhill, S. J., Currie, T. E., & Gray, R. D. (2009). Does horizontal transmission invalidate cultural phylogenies? Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences, 276, 2299–2306.
Hartwell, L. H., Hopfield, J. J., Leibler, S., & Murray, A. W. (1999). From molecular to modular cell biology. Nature, 402, C47–C52.
Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The riconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9–30.
Jacobs, Z., & Roberts, R. G. (2009). Catalysts for stone age innovations. Communicative and Integrative Biology, 2, 191–193.
Koonin, E. V., Makarova, K. S., & Aravind, L. (2001). Horizontal gene transfer in prokaryotes: Quantification and classification. Annual Review of Microbiology, 55, 709–742.
Kroeber, A. L. (1948). Anthropology. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.
Larson, G., Stephens, P. A., Tehrani, J. J., & Layton, R. H. (2013). Exapting exaptation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28(9), 497–498.
Lawrence, J. G., & Ochman, H. (1997). Amelioration of bacterial genomes: Rates of change and exchange. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 44, 383–397.
Lombard, L. M., & Haidle, M. N. (2012). Thinking a bow-and-arrow set: Cognitive implications of middle stone age bow and stone-tipped arrow technology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 22(2), 237–264.
Lombard, L. M., & Phillipson, L. (2010). Indications of bow and stone-tipped arrow use 64,000 years ago in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Antiquity, 84, 635–648. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 22(2), 237–264.
Lorenz, K. Z. (1973, December 12). Analogy as a source of knowledge. Nobel Lecture. In J. Lindsten (Ed.). (1992). Nobel lectures, physiology or medicine 1971–1980 (pp. 97–107). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.
Lucas, H. C., & Goh, J. M. (2009). Disruptive technology: How Kodak missed the digital photography revolution. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18, 46–55.
Lyman, R. L., Todd, L., Van Pool, T. L., & O’Brien, M. J. (2008a). Variation in North American dart points and arrow points when one or both are present. Journal of Archaeological Science, 35, 2805–2812.
Lyman, R. L., Van Pool, T. L., & O’Brien, M. J. (2008b). The diversity of North American projectile-point types, before and after the bow and arrow. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 28, 1–13.
McBrearthy, S. (2012). Sharpening the mind. Nature, 491, 531–532.
Neander, K. (1991). Function as selected effects: The conceptual analyst’s defense. Philosophy of Science, 58, 168–184.
O’Brien, M., & Lyman, R. L. (2002). Evolutionary archeology: Current status and future prospects. Evolutionary Anthropology, 11, 26–36.
O’Brien, M., Lyman, R. L., Mesoudi, A., & VanPool, T. L. (2010). Cultural traits as units of analysis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 365, 3797–3806.
Ochman, H., Lawrence, J. G., & Groisman, E. A. (2000). Lateral gene transfer and the nature of bacterial innovation. Nature, 405, 299–304.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shea, J. J., & Sisk, M. L. (2010). Complex projectile technology and homo sapiens dispersal into western Eurasia. Paleoanthropology, 2010, 100–122.
Simon, H. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106, 467–482.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of artificial. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Sisk, M. L., & Shea, J. J. (2009). Experimental use and quantitative performance analysis of triagular flakes (Levallois points) used as arrowheads. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36, 2039–2047.
Usher, A. P. (1929). A history of mechanical inventions. New York: Mc Graw Hill Book Company.
Woese, C. R. (1987). Bacterial evolution. Microbiological Reviews, 51, 221–271.
Woese, C. R. (2002). On the evolution of cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(13), 8742–8747.
Woese, C. R. (2004). A new biology for a new century. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 68, 173–186.
Wragg Sykes, R. M. (2015). To see a world in a hafted tool: Birch pich composite technology, cognition and memory in Neanderthals. In F. Coward, M. Pope, & F. Wenban-Smith (Eds.), Settlement, society and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgements
The inception of the bow-and-arrow has been fascinating and intriguing to me for a few years now, so I have bothered a number of colleagues and friends with this case study, and I would like to thank them all for their patience and suggestions.
However, I would like to acknowledge in particular my debt to five people, without whose support and help I would not have been able to write this paper.
First of all, my friend and colleague at the University of Udine, Dr Giusi Zaina. Giusi is a biologist and a molecular geneticist: I would not have ventured into bacterial evolution without her guidance. The background and insight into the Woesian World is hers; the possible misunderstandings, of course, are mine.
I would also like to acknowledge my friends and colleagues, Gino Cattani (Professor of Management and Organization at the NY Stern School of Business – New York University, US) and professor Pierpaolo Andriani (Professor of Complexity and Innovation Management at Kedge Business School, Marseille, France), with whom I discussed at length and ‘coevolved’ the theoretical frameworks underlying this paper.
Finally, I would like to thank Michael O’Brien (Dean and Professor of Anthropology and Archeology at the University of Missouri, US) and Robert Layton (Professor of Anthropology at the University of Durham, UK) for their suggestions and their encouragement which finally triggered the writing of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Carignani, G. (2016). On the Origin of Technologies: The Invention and Evolution of the Bow-and-Arrow. In: Panebianco, F., Serrelli, E. (eds) Understanding Cultural Traits. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24349-8_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24349-8_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-24347-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-24349-8
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)